Hi Vojtěch, This is a pretty impressive list of questions, thank you for that. I noticed that, compared to previous years, there is much more interest in the candidates and in the election in general, and I consider this as a good sign. Am Donnerstag, 3. Dezember 2020, 16:39:13 CET schrieb Vojtěch Zeisek:
dear candidates, I'd have few questions. :-) First of all, it's pleasure to see platforms of such a good candidates. Regardless results, I'm sure the updated Board will be excellent.
No doubt. We have a very strong group this time. Personally I would have loved to have a non-male candidate as well, but...we cant force anyone to step up.
I'd like to ask all of You (platforms [1-6]) for which of Your activities (read ways You help to improve the Project) do You need (or is highly helpful) to be Board member? I mean for which of Your targets, aims, goals, thoughts, agendas or objectives You need to be in Board, why is it necessary or helpful? Or asking from the opposite side, what of Your aims You can't do as any other community member?
To not repeat myself, I think I have answered most of this already in an early RFI [1]
Second, how do You understand the sentence "The purpose of the openSUSE Board is to lead the overall project." ([7], bit longer version at [8]) regarding the "main tasks" listed there and lack of any sort of executive power? Which kind of leadership (or governance), if any, do You have in mind in association with our Board?
The role of the board is described in the wiki and, as others have already pointed out, it is not a body like in a commercial company. openSUSE is a do-ocracy, so most of the activites - and direction to go - comes from the community. The board may be involved a bit earlier in some developments - like Closing the leap gap - but the board will not drive the direction. The board may seed ideas, or pick up opinions (should we rename openSUSE?) and do the necessary to come to a conclusion. But it is not imparative or directive.
Current members of the Board who would like to be re-elected (AFAIK simotek and DocB) I'd like to ask what are their major successes in the ending tenure. Regarding Your 2018 platforms [9-10], are there any aims, goals or thoughts You were planning, but for whatever reason rethink or failed? How did Your point of view developed in past 2 years?
As it was already pointed out, Simon has another year to go and is not due for re-election. The last election period was clearly split in half: First part was productive, while last year was...difficult. But I'm positive that the next two years will be better, otherwise I would not have stepped up for reelection. From my past experience - I have co-founded three companies and served nearly 20years as GmbH-Geschäftsführer (some kind of CEO) - I could bring in some experience in the Founation/e.V./Trademark discussion, and I hope to continue working on this. Goals achieved where networking with organizations, creating positive perception of openSUSE and working on software freedom. The current market situation, with pre-installed spyware systems on PC and Mac platforms, with the refusal of major brands to sell a system without those operating systems is clearly a blocker for free systems in the market. This will even get worse in the long run [4]. I triggerd an initiative - internally called OpenLetterEU - and we were able to join forces and ask some questions [2,3] to the EU commission (via a member of the European Parliament), targeting the monopolistic structure in the PC market with regard to preinstalled spyware systems. Answers were just posted and need evaluation.
When reading plans of DocB [11], Knurpht [12], Mark [13] and bit also Neal [14] I have obsessive feeling that You all are touching, from Your personal perspective and experience, similar problem/group of problems regarding communication among (sub)groups of members etc., coordination, and even possible some leadership/governance. If my impression is correct, I wonder what are Your intersections, shared points, and what are discrepancies among You? It looks to me that You use different words to say very similar things. Is my impression correct?
Yes
DocB, Mark, simotek and Neal mention creation of some sort of foundation, while Knurpht and m4u9 don't mention it. Knurpht and m4u9, do You think there should be no foundation at all? Or You just don't have strong opinion on that topic? DocB, Mark, simotek and Neal, do You have any particular idea how that foundation should look like? What are main advantages and risks of this transition?
As written before, I feel a legal structure could be beneficial. In the free software world we see a variety of solutions: Fedora is set-up similar as we now are, TheDocumentFoundation is (surprise) a foundation, and KDE is a e.V. We need to continue the discussion with SUSE, and depending on the outcome we can take next steps.
All of You, what do You think are main threats and challenges for our dear Project in near future? How to be prepared?
I see openSUSE in a good, stable condition. BUT if we do not get the attention the project deserves, which can lead to an erosion of the user base. Need to work against this by marketing and use of press contacts, presence on events and good talks about our key-advantages. Everyone is encouraged to contribute! And, as we see in the current, ongoing discussion, the community needs to become a bit more empathic about what to say and how to say. Sad to see hat we are losing users [5] on those kind of discussions... Cheers Axel [1] https://lists.opensuse.org/archives/list/project@lists.opensuse.org/ message/75AE3VWLI4KUKT5ONHTZWJ64CRABFK6R/ [2] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2020-005058_EN.html [3] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2020-005059_EN.html [4] https://sneak.berlin/20201112/your-computer-isnt-yours/ [5] https://lists.opensuse.org/archives/list/project@lists.opensuse.org/ message/3TZVOEJ5VNIFFIYQZAV35BNJBLTRZ5VO/